Lord Elystan-Morgan
Main Page: Lord Elystan-Morgan (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Elystan-Morgan's debates with the Ministry of Justice
(11 years, 5 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I fully agree with the noble Lord, and I think that both interventions have helped to clarify something that is not necessarily clear in coverage by the media. This judgment did not say that anybody should be released immediately or that whole-life tariffs may not be imposed, but it did say that we should look at such sentences in the light of what was described as penological purpose—punishment, rehabilitation and prevention. The court held that the system in England and Wales, which provides only for compassionate release, was not sufficient.
My Lords, it is this side. Then I am sure we will have time if we get a crack on.
I think the best thing that I can do is place a list in the Library. Over the years, the court has held against Britain in about 3% of cases. During that period, we have had the great benefit of being part of a continent-wide concept of upholding human rights, of which we should be proud.
Does the Minister accept that implementing faithfully a decision of the European court is not a peripheral luxury but something that binds us in law and in honour, and that the greatest architect of this institution was in fact Sir Winston Churchill?
There are a number of architects; Sir David Maxwell Fife was a notable originator. However, what the noble Lord said is absolutely right. That is precisely why, given the importance of this judgment, we intend to give it a full analysis and will provide our considered response in due course.